In 1996 the electric car was reintroduced to the American market by GM with its EV1 model. This film tells the short story of the rise and fall of the modern electric car and proposes the question: Who killed the electric car? Motor companies, government, inadequate battery technology, oil companies, the consumers, etc.?
Matrix of Sustainability Problems
The matrix of sustainability problems is best seen in this movie through evaluation of the stakeholders. Oil companies, with ever increasing profits, wrote editorials in papers and created fake grassroots organizations in fear of losing gas sales.
GM did not strongly advertise the EV1; in fact, GM had decided to put support behind the Hummer. GM also blatantly lied about the fate of EV1s with expired leases. When the Bush administration touted the wonders of hydrogen-powered vehicles, which still today has little potential, GM was standing right in line with the president. Another incentive for GM to not support electric cars are the lost potential profits from automobile parts. Electric cars need less repair and less replacement parts greatly cutting into companies' profits.
Persuasive and Compelling
Many things in this film are persuasive. In fact, this documentary is so compelling that it is difficult to find something not persuasive nor compelling about it. Here are a few interesting tidbits.
A quarter of 15-25 year-olds in Los Angeles have respiratory problems, most likely caused car-created smog. The cost of fueling an electric car is the same as a gas-powered one, so getting gas actually becomes a hassle when the alternative is charging at home or work. Electric cars meet the needs of over 90% of all Americans.
When Dr. Ovshinsky made greater advances in battery technology, he was silenced by the automobile and oil industries. Batteries today are cheaper than combustion engines. The average car on the road today is less efficient that 20 years ago. Hydrogen fuel cell automobiles use three times the amount of energy as electric cars.
Compelling quote by Mel Gibson: "Who controls the future? The one with the biggest club. In more ways than one. One to bash with, and one to belong to."
Environmental Education Value
Dr. Ovshinsky makes a great point, we shouldn't focus on the blame. Let's move on and make America strong again. This movie does that. It provides all the information so one is well informed, but it does not place the blame on any individual stakeholder.
Points of Intervention
California's Air Resource Board had a great opportunity to when it passed its Zero Emissions Mandate. The problem is that the board got scared by the motor companies and showed no backbone and no strength. Without enforcement of regulations, then is there really any point to them?
The hybrid has evolved as a hopeful alternative to gas-powered vehicles, although it is not nearly as advantageous as the electric car. The plug-in hybrid may be the next evolution to vehicle alternatives.
Who Killed the Electric Car?
(2006) Director: Chris PayneCentral Argument/Narrative
In 1996 the electric car was reintroduced to the American market by GM with its EV1 model. This film tells the short story of the rise and fall of the modern electric car and proposes the question: Who killed the electric car? Motor companies, government, inadequate battery technology, oil companies, the consumers, etc.?Matrix of Sustainability Problems
The matrix of sustainability problems is best seen in this movie through evaluation of the stakeholders. Oil companies, with ever increasing profits, wrote editorials in papers and created fake grassroots organizations in fear of losing gas sales.GM did not strongly advertise the EV1; in fact, GM had decided to put support behind the Hummer. GM also blatantly lied about the fate of EV1s with expired leases. When the Bush administration touted the wonders of hydrogen-powered vehicles, which still today has little potential, GM was standing right in line with the president. Another incentive for GM to not support electric cars are the lost potential profits from automobile parts. Electric cars need less repair and less replacement parts greatly cutting into companies' profits.
Persuasive and Compelling
Many things in this film are persuasive. In fact, this documentary is so compelling that it is difficult to find something not persuasive nor compelling about it. Here are a few interesting tidbits.A quarter of 15-25 year-olds in Los Angeles have respiratory problems, most likely caused car-created smog. The cost of fueling an electric car is the same as a gas-powered one, so getting gas actually becomes a hassle when the alternative is charging at home or work. Electric cars meet the needs of over 90% of all Americans.
When Dr. Ovshinsky made greater advances in battery technology, he was silenced by the automobile and oil industries. Batteries today are cheaper than combustion engines. The average car on the road today is less efficient that 20 years ago. Hydrogen fuel cell automobiles use three times the amount of energy as electric cars.
Compelling quote by Mel Gibson: "Who controls the future? The one with the biggest club. In more ways than one. One to bash with, and one to belong to."
Environmental Education Value
Dr. Ovshinsky makes a great point, we shouldn't focus on the blame. Let's move on and make America strong again. This movie does that. It provides all the information so one is well informed, but it does not place the blame on any individual stakeholder.Points of Intervention
California's Air Resource Board had a great opportunity to when it passed its Zero Emissions Mandate. The problem is that the board got scared by the motor companies and showed no backbone and no strength. Without enforcement of regulations, then is there really any point to them?The hybrid has evolved as a hopeful alternative to gas-powered vehicles, although it is not nearly as advantageous as the electric car. The plug-in hybrid may be the next evolution to vehicle alternatives.